NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES FOR REHEARING
AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF THE STATE OF
DEBORAH L. SHANKLIN
v. Appeal No. CRC 05-64 APANO
Opinion filed ____________________.
Appeal from a judgment and sentence
entered by the Pinellas County Court
County Judge Patrick Caddell
Deborah Shanklin, Pro Se
Macall Dyer, Esq.
ORDER AND OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Deborah Shanklin’s appeal from a judgment and sentence entered by the Pinellas County Court. After reviewing the briefs and record, this Court affirms the judgment and sentence.
The appellant was found guilty following a non-jury trial of violating St.Petersburg City Code §29-220(B) --- having a hedge on her property that was over six foot high. She is appealing the judgment and sentence.
appellate court must presume that the trial court’s judgment and sentence is correct
unless the appellant provides the appellate court with a record that is
sufficient to evaluate the appellant’s contentions of error. Harrison v.
Harrison, 909 So.2d 318 (
The appellant raises several issues. First, she claims that the judgment and sentence is erroneous because her husband, a co-owner of the property in question, was never charged or given notice of the case against his wife. The appellant, however, has not cited any legal authority to support her argument. In addition, this Court’s independent review of the case law did not uncover any legal authority to support the argument. It is the appellant that was charged with violating the ordinance, and there is no claim that she did not receive proper notice of the charge or that she was not given an opportunity to defend against it.
the appellant claims the ordinance violated her private property rights and her
right to be free from government intrusion. Courts in
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the judgment and sentence is affirmed.
AND ORDERED in Chambers at
J. Thomas McGrady
R. Timothy Peters
John A. Schaefer
cc: Macall Dyer, Esq.